But Democrats also have this internal debate over just how far they can go. They are still afraid of being perceived by the American people as being antitroops or antipatriotic," he adds. A strong showing from antiwar voters - expressed in e-mails, phone calls, or turnout at protests - "could provide an extra prod for Democrats to go that step further," Mr. Zogby adds.

But never fear. In the same article, the intrepid Brookings Institution graces us with the think-tank wisdom of imperial equivocation in the face of all that agitation from the Great Unwashed:

In response, some defense analysts say that polling data can be misleading. "Because only 30 percent say they still support the war doesn't mean that 70 percent are prepared to pack up and leave, no matter what happens to the region as a result," says Michael O'Hanlon at the Brookings Institution.

"It's the position of a third to half the Congress that we can still salvage something in Iraq," says Mr. O'Hanlon, noting that most of the Democratic leadership is not in that camp. "We haven't had a sophisticated development of Plan B in Iraq. Congress is in a good position to flesh out some options."

Who in the hell is the Brookings Institution, and why in the hell should any of us listen to them? Another academic policy mush-mill, with heavy recipe crossovers from the Democratic Leadership Council and its own mush-mill, the Progressive Policy Institute.

Here's what to do with these remarks from the Brookings Institution and all the other "centrist" mush-mills. Stuff a stack of their aimless pontifications into your handbag while you walk the dog, and use the pages to pick up shit.

Then go home and bombard these bobbing, weaving elected officials with a clear message that doesn't get past the rent-a-cops at the think tanks' front doors: Not one more day, not one more dime, not one more life, not one more lie.

Cut the money. Cut it all. Cut it now.

My own decision-allergic Congressman, who I will out here in a national venue, David Price, is now blathering about "exit strategy" (a think tank term if ever there was one) to avoid the issue of defunding the war. But he is on the defensive, as he was when 400 of us encamped in front of his office - with others inside, refusing to leave - to (successfully) pressure him to vote against the 2002 authorization for war (which he now proudly slaps on his website's front page. (Of course, he has voted every time since then to re-fund the war... Price is deep-down DLC).

My point? We did turn him on a vote, and it was civil disobedience - a 26-hour sit-in at his Chapel Hill office in October 2002 - that did the trick.

There is something about being polite when the blood is running down the gutters that should strike us all as obscene... sinful even.

Who qualifies for Congressional office occupations?

Anyone and everyone who still votes money for the war. Period. Take great big signs along that explain a very simple thing: An exit is a command, not a strategy. And take vets and military family members with you. Call us, and we'll go there so when the police show up to trespass us, you can videotape vets and military families being dragged out of Congressional offices in flex-cuffs. It's an irresistable image.

Contact Veterans For Peace, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Military Families Speak Out, and Gold Star Families for Peace, to identify their local membership and tell them when and where you are planning to take action.

Most elected officials do not want to take firm positions on anything, even on a bloodbath like the occupation of Iraq. It's their nature... the nature of the system. So we have to constrain their options. Don't think of them as peers and neighbors. They are gatekeepers, selected by big money. Work with them like you would with a bad mule. Give them a choice to cut the money or have ugly pictures of their offices on the front page.